Letters To the Editor

Several Good Reasons To Surface Purple Line

Montgomery County executive candidate Isiah Leggett continues to say the Purple Line belongs underground "to avoid neighborhoods" [Montgomery Notebook, Extra, June 15].

One good reason to put the line on the surface is because people prefer to ride there. I find the surface portion of my Metro trips preferable because I can look out the window. I am more comfortable being on the surface should some mishap occur. Getting on and off is quicker and I am oriented on alighting.

The reason the line will eventually be built mostly on the surface is that is the only affordable way. There are guidelines on funds for transportation. Money is simply not available for underground construction where surface right of way is available. People who wanted the intercounty connector built did not suggest it be underground "to avoid neighborhoods."

It is feasible to construct the Purple Line adjacent to an improved Capital Crescent Trail along what was the Georgetown Branch railroad right of way between Bethesda and Silver Spring. It can be done in a manner that ensures a safe and accessible pedestrian-bicycle trail.

Some undergrounding of the Purple Line may be required to ensure good service for a section of East Silver Spring and for the core of the University of Maryland campus.

John Carroll

Silver Spring

Purple Line Above Ground Would Be Too Destructive

There are excellent reasons for supporting selective undergrounding of the proposed Purple Line. First and foremost is that undergrounding would save a good many homes and neighborhoods in the Silver Spring, Bethesda and Chevy Chase areas.

As a Maryland Transit Authority consultant stated in public, "this is a very disruptive project." Additionally, the Capital Crescent Trail is a first-class trail used daily by thousands of walkers, runners and bicyclists and local, regional, national and international visitors. Purple Line supporters need to take their heads out of the sand, and back sound, truly cost-beneficial transportation solutions that do not disrupt and destroy residences, small business and urban greenways. They should support express buses between Metro lines and stations and the far more cost-beneficial, noncontroversial and nondestructive transit such as corridor cities.

Purple Line proponents claim that a transitway adjacent to the Capital Crescent Trail would be a compatible use. Aside from the very high cost, delay to build and the immense destructiveness of this proposal, such claims ignore such facts as: the loss of thousands of trees from a 50-foot or wider clear cut; the danger arising from a trail-transitway separation of eight feet (perhaps less); Beltway-like high noise levels every three minutes as the transit passes by; the visual ugliness and hum from overhead electric cables; or the possible spewing of cancer-causing diesel exhaust onto those nearby.